Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
Chris Hu said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
The OG Xbox was not part of a duopoly. It barely had any market share. |
It still had a lot more games in common with the PS2 then the Gamecube since it used the same type of media, despite being on the market two years less then the Gamecube.
|
Still doesn't make it a duopoly when total SW sales paled in comparison to PS2's and it most major 3rd party releases were exclusive or timed exclusive to PS2.
The fact that it was only four years in the market before being axed is testament to this, not a point in its favor.
|
Well the main reason it got axed early is because MS went into a bad business deal with NVIDIA if any one else would have made the GPU it would have been on the market a lot longer. In the US it did pretty good rest of the world not so much overall it still did better then the Gamecube and could have done a lot better then it, if it would have been on the market longer.
|
The GC is irrelevant to my argument. Gen 6 was most definitely not a PS and Xbox duopoly.
|
Maybe not where you lived but in the US the original X-Box was pretty popular and far from being a failure.
|
Irrelevant. For all I know, perhaps in Sweden the DC steamrolled over the competition. Doesn't make it a PS-DC duopoly.
"The place where you live" has nothing to do with the overall picture, otherwise you'll always be able to find some market where some console did better than average.
Anyway, if I wanted, I could nitpick your argument and say that PS2 outsold XB over 3.5:1 in NA and that the XB still got nowhere near the amount of 3rd party titles the PS2 did. But again, I don't even need to do that, because this discussion is not about your particular market.
There was no PS2-XB duopoly.
